en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·DSL EXTREME
| reply to jgkolt
Re: Suprised
Agreed... how can you do your job as a network security analyst when you're not allowed to inquiry/log an unrestricted DS3 from an outside vendor into your network.
What makes it scary is that even IF FBI/NSA claim they're only looking for certain items, with an unrestricted/unlogged network sniffing your traffic, how can you be sure that's what they're doing ?
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
jgkolt
Premium
join:2004-02-21
Lakewood, OH
clubs:
| To eliminate the thought of malicious intent look at this in terms of possible human error. No logging, no checking, which could be done. If the person on the other side of the ds-3 gets a virus of some kind there are no controls in place to stop the transmission.
--
Learning how to invest. Sign up to get 3 free trades for you and me each. Personal Message me. Thanks |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Exactly. Wether it be a virus, an open email relay flood, bad routing, someone could inadvertently bring a network to its knees by doing this.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
Done_Posting
Shoot to kill
Premium
join:2003-08-22
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable
| said by en102  :Exactly. Wether it be a virus, an open email relay flood, bad routing, someone could inadvertently bring a network to its knees by doing this. This type of carte blanche access disgusts me. I've had arguments about this with folks higher up the totem pole than me at the telecom I work for; it annoys me to no end that they insist on sticking with the "if you're not doing anything wrong, you have no need for privacy" BS.
Someone should be nailed to the wall for this.
- Tate
--
Happiness is an OC-48 in your basement... |
|
DonLibes
Premium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19
| said by Done_Posting :This type of carte blanche access disgusts me. I've had arguments about this with folks higher up the totem pole than me at the telecom I work for; it annoys me to no end that they insist on sticking with the "if you're not doing anything wrong, you have no need for privacy" BS. Doesn't the threat of a lawsuit concern them? |
|
Done_Posting
Shoot to kill
Premium
join:2003-08-22
Toledo, OH | No, I think they feel that letting the government rummage through anything they want is somehow more "patriotic" than honoring due process.
- Tate
--
Happiness is an OC-768 in your basement... |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
| reply to DonLibes
said by DonLibes :Doesn't the threat of a lawsuit concern them? Why do you think Bush & Co is pushing so hard for immunity from lawsuits? So they won't have to be concerned about it... ever. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
 ·magicjack.com
| said by KrK :Why do you think Bush & Co is pushing so hard for immunity from lawsuits? So they won't have to be concerned about it... ever. Ever? The immunity bill covers September 11, 2001 and January
17, 2007.
»rpc.senate.gov/_files/L43S2248FI···07ML.pdf
Mark |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | And everything in between, and probably forever. We're at war, remember.
Until the end of days.
 |
|
SipSizzurp
Fo' Shizzle
Premium
join:2005-12-28
Hilo, HI
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by KrK :We're at war, remember. Until the end of days. You would be shocked if you knew how factually accurate your statement is, and how close we really are !
 |
|
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17 | reply to KrK
War? War in Iraq? War on Drugs? War on Communism? War on... What war? |
|
voiplover
Premium
join:2004-05-28
Portsmouth, NH
·callwithus
| reply to en102
Two small points to remember:
1. Verizon was one of the companies that lost huge resources when the World Trade Centers fell.
2. Verizon has a right and a responsibility to monitor and protect their network and equipment.
As for the FBI, I haven't seen a paper trail from the FBI or Verizon regarding this and I hope that it doesn't exist.
So this is just speculation and theory. Maybe Verizon doesn't trust all of their employees????
Fortunately for me; I know the FBI doesn't have the time to listen to any calls made on my lines and nor could I care. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| said by voiplover :So this is just speculation and theory. Something to remember, the source (who qualified his comments with "apparent" this and "apparent" that) got a nice plug
"Babak Pasdar, now CEO of New York-based Bat Blue..." It wouldn't surprise me if the FBI abused the laws giving them access to communications. But, people need to realize how they may have their passions on this topic manipulated. Being passionate isn't the same as being smart.
Mark |
|
paulkruger
join:2006-07-27
Interlachen, FL | reply to SLD
All wars...we may not be done starting them all yet ?
LOL |
|
Qumahlin
Never Enough Time
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-05
united state
| reply to voiplover
said by voiplover :Fortunately for me; I know the FBI doesn't have the time to listen to any calls made on my lines and nor could I care. Congrats. Thats the exact quote of someone who doesn't understand the issue. A typical "I have nothing to hide so why should I care" response. Willing to give up your privacy at the drop of a hat simply because you think you don't need it.
I also want to make you aware that you would be damn surprised at how much time the FBI has. If you think everyone is busy running around and taking terrorists then you've been watching too many movies. The FBI is like any large corporation. Now how you do know who has access to the system? What happens when employees start abusing it unknowingly, or worse yet a criminal gains access to it.
Your attitude and those who share it are the people who are allowing this government to rob the people of their rights.
--
Forum Posts:7500 |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| said by Qumahlin :A typical "I have nothing to hide so why should I care" response.
And then:
said by Qumahlin :Your attitude and those who share it are the people who are allowing this government to rob the people of their rights.
OMG! Two cliches in one post. The difference being that the OP didn't accuse self-styled freedom fighters of allowing terrorists to operate freely.
Mark |
|
paulkruger
join:2006-07-27
Interlachen, FL
| Ben Franklin said it best...
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
People often misunderstand what the Constitution does. It does not give rights to anyone or to the government. It's only purpose is to set limits on the government's powers over it's citizens. It says what the government can not do and one of those ( 4th Amendment ) says they cannot search without a warrant that names the person or things to be seized and why.
People here have argued about "reasonable" vs. Probable Cause. There is a big difference. Probably Cause is what you need to provide a judge to obtain a warrant. No search is reasonable without probably cause.
The confusion about allowing a "reasonable search" without a warrant is upheld by courts where that search takes place at the time of an arrest or detention. Such searches are "reasonable" to protect an officer from a hidden weapon or to prevent the loss or destruction of evidence when time is of the essence. In most cases an officer will still obtain a warrant after the fact to document the facts that led to the search in order to protect against losing admissibility in court later.
Most of the time, if law enforcement has evidence of a crime or potential crime and it is not "immediate" they must present probably cause and obtain a warrant.
Nothing in "reason" or in "probable cause" permits a blanket search, ESPECIALLY without warrant against every citizen just to see what they might find. |
|
bookkeeping
join:2008-02-24
South Berwick, ME
| reply to voiplover
I say let them listen to me i would tell them to their faces the same thing i say on the phone fudge all goverments and presidents they all screw us one way or the other because none of us want to do any thing about it but complain. well i would do some thing about it but like presidents no one would follow through so why bitch about any thing your not going to do some thing about. there are ways to make companies do what you want when you have enough people to follow through with a plan my plan for internet and gas every one in the usa stop using it for one month. cancell all internet accounts then what are they going to do for gas stop driving for a week no cars running whats the most that will happen cleaner air oh my |
|
NOCMan
Verizon Fios User
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Flower Mound, TX
| reply to paulkruger
That's the problem. Our government is trying to say that terrorists do not have any protections and under that excuse they want to do warantless wiretapping.
The gotcha part is that the government is who defines the terrorists. So the terrorists could be anyone that is a treat to those in power. If we were about protecting the american people our borders would be sealed tight, we'd be kicking ass and taking names in Afganistan etc. |
|
paulkruger
join:2006-07-27
Interlachen, FL
| It's not about whether or not a "terrorist" has any protections. Who is a terrorist? Terrorism is a crime just as is murder or arson and no one is legally any of those unless arrested, tried and convicted. Some "specific person" has to be accused and the process followed to determine if they are or are not a terrorist.
The discussion is about spying on ALL American Citizens because someone in the government thinks they may find out a few my be determined to be terrorists. It is a dragnet applied to everyone whether or not they are suspect. |
|
